On September 2, 1994, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government, the Fayette County Detention Center, the Director of the Fayette Detention Center, and a Fayette Detention Center officer in the United States District Court for the ...
read more >

On September 2, 1994, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Lexington Fayette Urban County Government, the Fayette County Detention Center, the Director of the Fayette Detention Center, and a Fayette Detention Center officer in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Plaintiff, represented by private counsel, alleged his constitutional rights were violated when Defendants strip-searched him four times. Plaintiff alleged the strip-searches were unreasonable, violated his privacy and equal protection rights, and were cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Plaintiff additionally alleged state law claims of negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff later dropped his claims relating to three of the strip searches.

The parties stipulated that on September 7, 1993, Plaintiff was taken to the Fayette District Court for arraignment. Plaintiff was strip-searched according to Defendants' policy to strip-search all pretrial detainees after arraignment who would be remaining in their facility. Plaintiff alleged that strip-searching him without individualized reasonable suspicion violated his rights and that strip-searching detainees after arraignments was unjustified because officers maintained control over detainees during the arraignment process.

On September 30, 1996, the District Court (Judge Karl S. Forester) granted summary judgment for Defendants on Plaintiff's federal claims and declined jurisdiction over Plaintiff's remaining state law clams. The Court held that Defendant's policy of strip-searching pretrial detainees, even those held for minor, nonviolent traffic offenses, upon their return from the courtroom to the general population of the detention center was reasonable. The Court found that (1) Defendant's policy of searching detainees who were arraigned and then returned to the detention center was sufficiently narrow, and was distinguishable from searches as part of initial booking procedures; and (2) there were sufficient opportunities for detainees to get contraband during the arraignments to justify Defendant's strip-search policy. Richerson v. Lexington Fayette Urban Cnty. Gov't, 958 F.Supp. 299 (E.D.Ky. 1996).